Strategic Design of “Three‐in‐One” Cathode Toward Optimal Performance of Proton‐Conducting Solid Oxide Fuel Cell: The Temperature Matters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT “Three‐in‐one” cathode, achieved via B‐site heavy‐doping of transition elements (typically Co, Fe) into proton‐conductive perovskite, holds promise for enhancing the performance of proton‐conducting solid oxide fuel cell (H‐SOFC) operated below 650°C for electricity generation. However, its electrochemical behavior above 650°C, essential for improving the efficiency of H‐SOFC for fuel conversion, remains insufficiently explored. It is still challenging to propose guidance for the design of “three‐in‐one” cathode toward optimal H‐SOFC performance below and above 650°C, with the prerequisite of gaining a comprehensive understanding of the roles of Co and Fe in determining the H‐SOFC performance. This work is to address this challenge. Through theoretical/experimental studies, Co is identified to play a role in improving the oxygen reduction reaction (ORR) activity while Fe plays a role in facilitating the cathode/electrolyte interfacial proton conduction. Therefore, if the operating temperature is above 650°C, lowering the Co/Fe ratio in “three‐in‐one” cathode becomes crucial since the limiting factor shifts from ORR activity to proton conduction. Implementing this strategy, the SOFC using BaCo 0.15 Fe 0.55 Zr 0.1 Y 0.1 Yb 0.1 O 3− δ cathode achieves peak power densities of 1.67 W cm −2 under H‐SOFC mode at 700°C and 2.32 W cm −2 under dual ion‐conducting SOFC mode at 750°C, which are the highest reported values so far.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it